1.   This Court  lacks subject  matter jurisdiction  because

the record does not exhibit the authorization required by Section

7401 of  the Internal  Revenue Code  (hereinafter  "IRC").    The

summonses in  question are entitled "Collection Summons", and IRC

7401 makes  explicit reference to civil actions for "collection".

There is no evidence on the record that the Secretary of the U.S.

Department of  the  Treasury,  or  his  delegate,  authorized  or

sanctioned these  proceedings.   No such evidence was ever served

on Respondent:


     Thus, where  the Congress  prohibits the  commencement of  a
     civil action  unless certain  specific acts  are  performed,
     this Court has no jurisdiction over the subject matter until
     the requisite conditions are met in fact and such compliance
     is shown  by the pleadings and, where necessary, established
     by proof.  ... [B]ut  the mere allegation of facts necessary
     for  jurisdiction   without  supporting   proof  is  fatally
     defective. ...  This Court holds that 26 U.S.C. Section 7401
     requirements constitute  facts  essential  to  jurisdiction.
     The failure  to prove jurisdictional facts when specifically
     denied is fatal to the maintenance of this action.

                        [USA v. One 1972 Cadillac Coupe De Ville]
                    [355 F.Supp. 513, 515 (1973), emphasis added]


     2.   IRC 7401  requires that  the "Secretary"  authorize  or

sanction such  proceedings.    The  term  "Secretary"  means  the

Secretary of  the Treasury  or his  delegate, IRC 7701(a)(11)(B).

Since January  of 1993, lawful delegation by Mr. Lloyd Bentsen to

any subordinates  has been  impossible.  During his latest Senate

term beginning  in January of 1989, Mr. Bentsen voted to increase

the pay for the office of the U.S. Secretary of the Treasury, see

P. L.  101-194, 5  U.S.C. 5318.   His  vote  now  bars  Him  from

occupying that  office until  the end  of his  latest Senate term

(January 3,  1995).   This bar  is found in Article 1, Section 6,

Clause 2  (1:6:2) of  the Constitution  for the  United States of

America (hereinafter  "U.S. Constitution"),  as lawfully amended.

Congress cannot  cure this  bar, because it cannot by legislation

alter the  U.S. Constitution,  from which  alone it  derives  its

power to legislate, and within whose limitations alone that power

can be  lawfully exercised, see Eisner v. Macomber, 252 U.S. 189,

206 (1920)  and U.S.  v. Twenty-Two  Firearms,  463  F.Supp.  730

(1979).  Unlawful exercise of power is a violation of Law.
      

Return to Table of Contents for

John E. Trumane